SANTOSH KUMAR JHA Vs. BANDANA KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been directed against the impugned judgment dtd. 19/5/2015 and decree dtd. 27/5/2015 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Darbhanga in Matrimonial Case No. 73 of 2013, H.M.A. No. 253 of 2012, whereby and whereunder the matrimonial case filed by the appellant for dissolution of marriage with the respondent has been dismissed.

(2.) It is worth to mention that initially, matrimonial case was filed before the Family Court, Rohini, Delhi but on the petition of respondent it was transferred by the Hon'ble Supreme Court to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Darbhanga vide its order dtd. 11/2/2013 in Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 1453 of 2012 for trial and expeditious disposal.

(3.) Briefly stated facts of the appellant's case is that both parties solemnized marriage on 19/11/2003 at Darbhanga according to Hindu Customs and Rites. It is averred that on 17/11/2004 a girl child was born at Darbhanga out of the aforesaid wedlock. It is claimed by the appellant that respondent is an ambitious lady as she has affinity with her father who is the professor in Lalit Narayan Mishra University, Darbhanga and the respondent tried to prove that she is the ideal child of her father and since the date of inception of marriage, respondent has shown rigid and adamant approach and she has non-compromising attitude towards the appellant. The appellant has stated that he entered into relationship just on account of educational background of family of respondent but the respondent did not support the appellant as she is taking care of her father and mother in comparison to appellant. It is claimed by the appellant that appellant brought the respondent to Delhi in April, 2004 but in the month of July, 2004 father of the respondent came and brought her back to Darbhanga. It is further claimed by the appellant that respondent did not agree to return to her matrimonial home from July, 2004 to January, 2008 and during the said period she did not join her matrimonial home at Delhi and deserted the appellant completely. It is averred that in the month of January, 2008 respondent came to Delhi on the condition that appellant shall make a separate accommodation for the respondent and respondent joined the matrimonial home and stayed till July, 2008 with the appellant and she became pregnant. In July, 2008 she was taken by her father to her parental house and pregnancy of respondent was terminated without knowledge of the appellant. It is also averred by the appellant that respondent was brought back to Delhi in the month of January, 2009 and again she became pregnant and she went to Darbhanga against the wishes of appellant in the month of May, 2009 on the pretext of appearing in some exams and again her pregnancy was aborted without giving any intimation to the appellant and the said conduct of the respondent gave shock and mental cruelty to the appellant. It is also claimed by the appellant that in the month of September 2010, appellant met with an accident and he was living separately and there was nobody to take care of him but respondent did not join the company of the appellant despite being persuasion made by the appellant. It is also claimed that the respondent joined the appellant in January, 2011 and again she became pregnant and respondent went to Dr. Amita Dhawan (Gyneacologist) for routine check up who confirmed the pregnancy of about nine weeks on 21/4/2011 and again on the pretext of visiting her parents, respondent went to her parents house and left Delhi on 20/5/2011 and after reaching her parents house, respondent aborted her pregnancy against the wishes of the appellant. It is further claimed that appellant reached Darbhanga, which is also native place of appellant and he approached the respondent at her parents' house but the respondent flatly refused to join the company of the appellant and she did not accompany the appellant, even after a return Railway ticket was arranged for her. Despite persuasion made by the appellant, all the efforts became futile. It is claimed that respondent is determined to desert the appellant and it has been alleged that the attitude of the respondent clearly indicates that she is not willing to join her husband's matrimonial house rather she is staying at her parental house. It has been claimed that cruel and neglecting behaviour of the respondent caused mental agony to the appellant and said attitude has humiliated the appellant in the eyes of relatives and friends. It has been asserted that appellant has not condoned the act of cruelty and desertion of the respondent and the constant harassment by the respondent subjected the appellant to extreme cruelty, rendering all the appellant's efforts futile.